SUBSCRIBE:

Dozens of activists, journalists charged for insulting Kuwait's emir

Share

The Kuwaiti authorities should drop criminal charges against dozens of online activists, journalists, and politicians for legitimately exercising their rights to freedom of expression, Human Rights Watch said today. The authorities should also withdraw charges and overturn the sentences for at least 10 people already convicted in such cases, as recently as April 15, 2013.

Since a political crisis in June 2012, authorities have charged dozens of politicians, online activists, and journalists with “offending” the emir, Kuwait's head of state, Human Rights Watch has learned from the defendants, their lawyers, and human rights activists.

“No one should ever be prosecuted solely for expressing peaceful criticism,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “Kuwaiti authorities should immediately drop all charges against government critics and others for peacefully exercising their right to free speech.”

On April 15, a criminal court sentenced Mussalam al-Barak, a former member of parliament and a leading opposition figure, to five years in prison for “offending the emir.” The court found that he did so in a speech at a demonstration on October 20, in which he said, apparently addressing the emir, “Your Highness, we will not let you govern autocratically.”

On March 31, a criminal court sentenced an online activist, Hamed al-Khalidi, to two years in prison on the same charge for several Twitter postings in August. In one tweet, he said, “if he passes away, I will go to the street dressed in orange [the color used by critics and opponents of the Kuwaiti government],” according to court documents obtained by Human Rights Watch. The court acknowledged that al-Khalidi “did not mention the emir directly” but held that he “knew about the elements of the crime” and had a “willingness” to commit “the crime.”

On March 7, a criminal court sentenced another online activist, Sagar al-Hashash, to two years in prison on the same charge for comments on Twitter in October and in an article on his blog, “To His Highness the Emir Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad.” Al-Hashash is serving his prison term, although he has filed an appeal that has yet to be heard.

On February 5, a criminal court imposed three year prison sentences on three former members of Kuwait's parliament on the same charges for speeches at a public gathering in October. They filed appeals and are free on bail.

On January 6, a criminal court sentenced an online activist, Rashed al-Enzi, to two years in prison on the same charge for several Twitter postings on October 23, 2012. One read: “The coward escapes after orders something that might destabilize security and this is case today, the coward fled after issuing its order.” He is also in prison, though he has filed an appeal. During an appeal hearing on February 13, 2013, that Human Rights Watch attended and observed, al-Enzi told the court that his tweet concerned a security official who had allegedly ordered a crackdown on demonstrators on October 23, not the emir.

Most of those charged face prosecution under article 25 of the Penal Code of 1970, which sets a maximum sentence of five years for anyone who publicly “objects to the rights and authorities of the emir or faults him.” Under article 54 of the Kuwaiti constitution, the emir is the head of state and his person is “immune and inviolable.”

“The Kuwaiti authorities should not be jailing opposition activists and journalists on charges of 'offending the emir' but instead scrapping the criminal code provision that makes this a crime, and upholding their international obligation to protect free speech,” Whitson said.

Since mid-2012 Kuwait has been caught in a political crisis amid deepening tension between the government and opposition. In June 2012, the emir, Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah, suspended the parliament elected in February for a month, and it was then dissolved under a Constitutional Court ruling. In October, the emir amended the country's electoral law and ordered new parliamentary elections on December 1.

The emir's actions provoked opposition from various quarters, including Islamists, liberals, nationalists, and some clans, who contended that parliament, not the emir, should make any changes to the electoral law. They organized public meetings and called for a boycott of the December 1 election. The turnout was much smaller than for the February election. In several cases leading up to the election, the security forces used teargas and sound bombs to disperse protesters, and in late October the government briefly banned further protests.

Kuwait's prosecuting authorities and some politicians have particularly targeted Al Youm, a privately-owned satellite TV channel. They have filed court complaints against at least a dozen journalists and other media workers at the TV station, accusing them of “offending the emir,” “violating public decency,” and “defaming” politicians, according to court filings obtained by Human Rights Watch.

In late December, the Information Ministry shut down Al Youm for allegedly failing to appoint a director to administer the station. The Administrative Court of Appeal overturned this decision in February, and the station has resumed broadcasting.

Criminal prosecution for peaceful criticism of public officials violates international human rights standards. Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Kuwait ratified in 1996, protects the right to freedom of expression, including “freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.”

The United Nations Human Rights Committee, the treaty-monitoring body that provides the definitive interpretation of the ICCPR, has stated that, “All public figures, including those exercising the highest political authority such as heads of state and government, are legitimately subject to criticism and political opposition,” and that there is consequently a need for “uninhibited expression” in public debate concerning public figures.

After already cracking down on freedom of information in recent years, President Erdoğan has taken advantage of the abortive coup d’état and the state of emergency in effect since 20 July to silence many more of his media critics, not only Gülen movement media and journalists but also, to a lesser extent, Kurdish, secularist and left-wing media.

This publication presents the findings of the media development assessment in Mongolia that began in 2012 to determine the state of the media in the country. The assessment was based on the UNESCO/IPDC Media Development Indicators (MDIs), an internationally recognized analytical tool used to provide detailed overviews of national media landscapes and related media development priorities.

“After the initial optimism during the Euromaidan movement, many journalists have become disillusioned. They are faced with the triple challenge of the war in the Eastern part of the country, the economic crisis and the digitalization of mass media.”

An officer of the Myanmar army recently filed a criminal complaint against two journalists for allegedly sowing disunity among the military. Even though mediation by the Press Council caused the military to withdraw the case, this incident demonstrates how the military continues to throw its weight to get back at what it perceives as negative publicity.

The government uses draconian laws such as the sedition provisions of the penal code, the criminal defamation law, and laws dealing with hate speech to silence dissent. These laws are vaguely worded, overly broad, and prone to misuse, and have been repeatedly used for political purposes against critics at the national and state level.

In recent years, the space afforded to civil society to operate freely has been shrinking dramatically across the world, presenting a serious threat to democracy and human rights. Eastern Europe and Central Asia (EECA) have been especially badly affected by this shrinking political space.

The report is a frank assessment of the recent regime of online censorship and mass surveillance against a backdrop of longstanding, serious abuses of the judicial process and attacks on freedom of expression by Turkish authorities.

The report surveys the rocky landscape for media and public discourse since the ruling military junta lifted the curtain on the southeast Asian nation in 2012 after five decades of isolation from the modern world.

With the environment now recognized as a major challenge for humankind, Reporters Without Borders believes that particular attention should be paid to the journalists who take greats risk to investigate sensitive, environment-related subjects. The report highlights a steady deterioration in the situation for environmental reporters, who are increasingly exposed to many kinds of pressure, threats and violence.

The Pakistani government has significantly expanded its communication interception activities. This Privacy International report covers the intelligence services plan to capture all IP-traffic in Pakistan and other initiatives, pointing to gaps in the laws governing surveillance.

The need to regulate the transfer of surveillance technologies that pose a risk to human rights has been largely recognised by EU institutions and some EU member states. It is no longer a question of if the EU should do more in this area, but how.

Defamation and insult remain criminal offences in Portugal punishable by up to two years behind bars despite the fact that a number of international human rights bodies have found criminal defamation to be a disproportionate restriction on freedom of expression.

Despite its Constitutional commitment to free speech, India’s legal system makes it surprisingly easy to silence others. Routine corruption, inefficiency, and the selective enforcement of vague and overbroad laws allow individuals, or small groups, to censor opinions they find distasteful. - See more at: http://www.pen-international.org/the-india-report-executive-summary-and-key-findings/#sthash.TIIM2xbu.dpuf

Press freedom in the Philippines continued to be under attack from 2014 to 2015. The killing of journalists is continuing, with four journalists killed from May 2014 to May 2015. The trial of the accused masterminds of the Ampatuan (Maguindanao) Massacre and their supposed henchmen is continuing, but with a primary accused was released, while a witness in the same case was killed.

The year 2014 saw Malaysians standing up to exercise the rights guaranteed under the Federal Constitution, including freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. This continues a growing trend of facing up to state oppression. Unfortunately, this has been met with increasing repression. Malaysia has seen a concerted crackdown on the freedom of expression in the year 2014, which has escalated even further in 2015.

IFEX publishes original and member-produced free expression news and reports. Some member content has been edited by IFEX. We invite you to contact [email protected] to request permission to reproduce or republish in whole or in part content from this site.